Posts Tagged ‘
sue-ann levy ’

I know I’ve written about that hateful little troll, Toronto Sun’s Sue-Ann Levy, before, but now that the one man that could make her forget she’s gay (Rob Ford), has gotten off on a technicality, she is in full-on murder-everyone-who-doesn’t agree-with-you mode.

No, it’s not a “right” or “left” thing, Conservative versus Liberal thing (how did all the “Commies” suddenly become Liberals anyways?!), it’s an asshole versus reasonable human being thing. I mean, if she’s so hot for gambling and prostitutes and all the other crap Ford wants to swaddle the city with, why doesn’t she walk on down to the nearest street corner and spread that musty cavern of hers? Oh, right, it’s because she would have to do what she demands that everyone else do.

Because, you know, there is simply no other way for the government to make money, despite the offensive deposition Ford put everyone through while he was (we can only guess), snorting coke in some back room and completely ignoring everyone’s ideas. I know the coke thing is a rumour, but I’ve had enough experience with drugs to see that this is probably the case — the sweating, the holier-than-thou attitude, the confrontationalism, the ruddy face, etc. Chances of Rob snorting: very high.

Just to be clear, just because he may do drugs wouldn’t necessarily make Rob an awful person (except that he is), but I’m pretty damn sure he should not be holding office under the influence, driving under the influence, etc.

And the “technicality” term being tossed around? People like Levy love to use that word when describing how the mayor snubbed his nose at all the rules and laws of our city multiple times, or how he directly, knowingly, and willfully voted on something directly and monetarily affecting him. Those are “technicalities”, but the fact that Toronto Council wasn’t supposed to have imposed a punishment (hence the loss of the entire case), is not a technicality, that’s JUSTICE!

That’s also precisely how murderers, rapists, and drug dealers get away with it — legal technicalities are a criminal’s best friend.

But, you know, Levy’s just fine with that. People shouldn’t be held to account. Whoring out your daughters is a wonderful future for them. Getting into drinking and gambling, why, that’s practically next to godliness. Shouldn’t be surprising then that this creature passing for a woman would now be chastising Councillor Ana Bailao for her drunken driving charge, right? After all, drinking and gambling is precisely what we want in this town, so anyone who does it should immediately lose their job. (I’m sorry if this is twisting your brain — this is a Ford-lover we’re talking about here)

I happen to agree somewhat, drinking and driving is bad. Somewhat worse than, say, Ford driving while reading, or threatening the lives of passengers on a streetcar by plowing past its open doors, but the Ford-supporter hypocrisy is flying its true, shit-brown colours by defending Ford’s complete lack of regret and remorse (not even a hint of apology or a thought to changing his ways). Bailao drank and drove, potentially endangering many people on the road…the guillotine for her! Ford drove distractedly and dangerously an multiple occasions, unapologetically and directly endangering people on and off the road…oh, he just made a mistake; let’s use tax money and get him a driver!

And this is pretty much the Ford / Harper / etc. camp philosophy in a nutshell. It’s a philosophy that turns on others with the most outrageous slanders, hatred, and vitriol — remember Ford / Cherry’s inaugural speech? Of course, if you call them so much as “silly” they’ll call for your public hanging. They openly and gleefully promote vice, crime, selfishness, greed, money money money, me me me, to the exception of everything else, push on with bullheaded ideas despite any planning or consultation, and are basically oblivious to anything but their own whiny needs. And none of these characteristics are incongruous — these are just simply vile, offensive, pin-headed people. If you want to be nice, “petulant adult-children” works too.

The really sad part is that these people are so blind to basic human concepts like faith, charity, love, and kindness, that they’re willing to forfeit their entire family’s future on a momentary status gain. It’s all about feeding the overly swollen ego — me, me, me! And for some reason, they think that in the groups of selfish, uncaring, self-loving aggressors they move in, that they’re going to achieve some sort of universal love and acceptance from everyone by beating them down, insulting them, and making their lives miserable.

It’s really not that complicated…

Psychopathy: is a personality disorder that has been variously characterized by shallow emotions (including reduced fear, a lack of empathy, and stress tolerance), coldheartedness, egocentricity, superficial charm, manipulativeness, irresponsibility, impulsivity, criminality, antisocial behavior, a lack of remorse, and a parasitic lifestyle.

You gotta love the twisted logic it requires to be a Rob Ford supporter these days. Sue-Ann Levy (thanks for the find, Sarah), is just one cautionary example.

In her article berating Councillor Karen Stintz’ and her “Gang of 23” for taking an “unprincipled stand” against Ford’s let’s shove all transit underground and out of sight philosophy. Just look at the Scarborough RT, for example, what a shambles!

Yeah, well I did my time in Scarborough and couldn’t help but notice how our crappy RT, which is above ground, compared to the rest of the TTC, large sections of which also runs above ground. Levy and Ford, though, probably wouldn’t know that. And yes, the RT is kinda famously not compatible with the rest of the subway system so making the systems link up would make sense. But that’s not what Fordo supported when he unanimously overstepped his bounds, declared Transit City dead, and pronounced that Eglinton would be getting low-floor underground trains requiring a different rail gauge — exactly like the LRT.

And besides, Sue-Ann’s got her crusties all in a bunch because it was Toronto that elected the mayor with a loud and plain voice (no doubt), of 47% of voters, while Stintz is running amok with just 23 renegade Councillors which, for some reason, is not a democratically elected, and arguably much wiser, majority (there are 44 Councillors in total).

Well, Sue-Ann, let me break it down for you: I’m sure these 24 Councillors, making up 54% of Council, collectively got way more votes than His Weightiness, and if you weren’t filled with such glaring blind spots and adoration for your rotund master, you’d realize that this is the actual voice of Toronto that this “gang” of Councillors represents. Or does the concept of representative democracy not really make sense to you?